0.phoneArena04 Nov 2013, 21:12posted on

A leaked internal document shows that Sprint customers will get their first crack at the Moto Maker starting November 11th; the date was spotted on a leaked copy of the Sprint Playbook and mentions which of the Motorola Moto X features are customized by the Moto Maker website, which until now has been an AT&T exclusive...

Excellent. Now that Motomaker is available and the Moto X's price is better, interest is picking up. Would have had three Motomaker sales over the weekend if our POS system didn't have a glitch related to it. As it is we've already sold through our (limited) stock of Verizon and Sprint Moto Xs, and are selling the AT&T version at an increased pace.

I expect that Motorola's Q4 sales numbers will look a little better than Q3, at least.

The prepaid device with reasonable full pricing will be the Moto G. The Moto X is fine the way it is.

Due to the reality of what people will pay 200 bucks for, I agree that it should have been placed at 100 bucks on contract to begin with, though I personally would have still done 200 bucks for it if I had it.

However, at 100 bucks it IS selling. Consumer interest is also picking up as they learn more about it. The biggest problems Motorola faces are marketing and salesperson apathy. When I stopped in a Verizon store the other day for a car cradle, one of the two salespeople I spoke with had no clue what the Moto X was about or what its selling points were, and the other knew barely more. Salespeople can be quite leery about trying to sell a new and different product, since it inherently carries a higher risk of return due to unfamiliarity with the product for both the consumer and the salesperson.

If Motorola was smart they would get the Moto X into as many salespeoples' hands as possible and ramp up their marketing more. However, as long as they sell enough to gain traction in the market again, the Moto X has done its job.

I disagree. The Moto X has lost a lot of steam. It should've been more than what it is but it ended up going the way of the Bionic. Motorola could've had a phone that could have catered to budget friendly consumers but they missed the ball on that one.

I don't need to be vindicated because it has happened before. How many times has Motorola dropped the ball with their devices? Look at the Atrix line of phones. Phones that were given high praise yet were left in the dark.

That experience you speak of will cost Motorola dearly especially with their little made in America stint. Plus charging premium price with midrange specs didn't help any.

How many times has Motorola dropped the ball? Depends on how you define dropping the ball. The original Droid started on 2.0 and ended up on 2.2. The Droid X started on 2.1 and ended up on 2.3.7. The original Atrix didn't get updated beyond Gingerbread, nor did their similar Tegra powered cousins, but this seemed to be an issue with the Tegra processor and Nvidia being assholes. Note that Motorola has never used Tegra again. The original RAZR line (regular and Maxx) have been updated to Jelly Bean, as has the Bionic. How many Galaxy S2 units ended up on Jelly Bean? Or any other phones that started on Gingerbread, for that matter? The Atrix 2, being a midrange device, ended up on ICS. The Atrix HD, another low to midranger, is on Jelly Bean with future possible updates. Same goes for the 2012 RAZRs. Now we have KitKat promised for all of the current Motorola models. That's a track record on par with or better than the competition, with the sole exception of the ICS issue with the Atrix/Photon/Electrify.

As for the price, whether or not 200 is too much is entirely a matter of opinion. People snapped up the Dev edition of the Moto X and its cousins (at full retail) so fast that they sold out a couple times. Now that the price is going to 100 bucks its an even better deal. Customers respond positively to just about everything about the Moto X, and Motomaker is drawing strong interest too.The holiday season will likely not be too strong for Motorola, since that's usually Apple's territory, but post holidays I think we'll see sales pick up. I also believe that made in America is more than just a "stint" for Google and Motorola.

The Atrix isn't exactly a midranger. It has an affordable price but it's specs are pretty good. The Moto X doesn't have nearly as good specs as the Atrix, and yet it was far more expensive. The whole manufactured in America is going to put them in the hole.

The X2 never saw an update, to which many customers were angry about. Moto has promises to update but that doesn't guarantee that they will.

I don't think the X has produced the results Motorola's pushing for and it's going to cost them dearly.

To which Atrix are you referring? If you're referring to the original Atrix, it had top line specs for its day, yes. However, the Atrix 2 and HD both had mid range specs (and pricing) when they were released. The Moto X's specs are only "midrange" in two areas-the primary processor/GPU and screen resolution.

However, the RAM and storage were both in line with a 200 dollar device, and the processor still wasn't exactly something to sneeze at. Furthermore, the secondary cores offload major processing work from the main cores, resulting in battery life and real world performance in line with phones that have twice the processor cores and better GPUs.

Specs don't matter like they used to, Mxy. They're mainly a phallic measuring contest. The point of the Moto X was not to compete on those grounds, but to offer a phone that was far more convenient to use than any other Android device out there. Every. Single. One. of its selling points works toward this goal; the quick launch/easy to use camera, the touchless voice control, the active notifications, Moto Assist, Connect, and Care, and even the simplicity and quick delivery of Motomaker (due largely to its assembly in the USA). It's like a concept album in music: individually, none of the parts are super impressive, but when you put them together you see a single, cohesive idea that they all work toward, and the Moto X becomes more than the sum of its parts.

I also disagree that making the phone in America is going to put them in the whole. It costs more to do so, but not prohibitively so. Remember that shipping and tariff costs aren't nearly what they are for a phone built entirely elsewhere. This will be more and more true the more component manufacturing Google can establish in the USA. Furthermore, it does strike major points with the public. If you tell someone that something's made in the USA, you can usually see their interest visually pick up. It plays on patriotic feelings, and intrinsically people know that if something's being built here, it means that the company making it is helping our economy by putting people to work. Think about how revitalized our economy could be if the number of people needed to populate a Foxconn plant suddenly had jobs here.

As for the X2, it was part of the Tegra line of phones that Motorola put out. 2011 was not a good year for Motorola. I file that in with the Atrix/Photon problem. Motorola has since followed through with every update promise they've given, sometimes quicker than the competition.

Like I've said before, Mxy, one of us will be proven right in the coming months, through this time next year. I'm not saying the Moto X is going to be a blockbuster, but when Motorola is one of two companies that actually gained US marketshare in the last couple of months, that's saying something.

There's nothing midranged about the Atrix 2 and HD. Yes, they weren't as powerful as a Note 2 or the S4 but they were certainly more than the X phone. It seems corners were cut in the specs for the X phone. That was the point I was making.

Yes it certainly has RAM but you and I both know a gig of ram doesn't cut it these days unless you're an iPhone. Android is a system heavy OS which is why Google implemented that new ram feature in kitkat.

Specs do matter to some degree. You just don't want to admit it since the specs on the x phone can't really compete with let's say the nexus 5.

The whole made in America thing is going to bite them in the long run. Why do you think companies go overseas for manufacturing? Unless you're in a conservative state you're not going to e doing that well considering the high cost to do manufacturing here in the us. That plus the rules and regulations.

I'm not trying to be pompous but we both know I'll be right in the coming months. Motorola has lost a lot of traction with the x phone. They've waited too long for it to come out with the Moto maker.

Where the hell does it seem like corners were cut on the Moto X compared to the last two Atrixes?

Specs matter to a degree, but once you get past Galaxy S3 specs they really don't unless you're beating the hell out of the processor with a supremely heavy app. My Mini can handle any task I've thrown its way, even playing a game and music at the same time. Its lower relative processing power is offset by the fact that as opposed to Samsung and HTC, it doesn't have as much straining the primary processor and RAM just to run. Have you taken a look at the S4's RAM usage? Half is gone just when it's sitting idle, and that's mostly due to all the extra crap that Samsung dumped on the phone along with Touchwiz.

Meanwhile, the secondary processors on the Moto X and its cousins take the brunt of nearly all the extras Motorola put on its phones, leaving the primary cores free for the most part.

Again, you're falling back into the phallic measuring contest, Mxy. What was the Moto X built to do? What was its function? Unlike most Android phones, Google and Motorola had a point to make with this phone. They made it to cater to people who want the phone to be an extension of their daily lives, not another gadget to bury their noses in. The Moto X was built to look things up quickly, to take pictures quickly, to give notifications quickly, all with a minimal effort by the user. It does all of that beautifully, and still manages to be competent at most other everyday tasks that people use their phones for.

If you look at the Moto X through the lens of what it was made to do, then you understand why it's such an elegant device. What you are in effect trying to do is take a Buick station wagon that was built to haul people and tow trailers and pit it against a Corvette, and claim that since the station wagon doesn't race as fast as the Corvette, it's not as worthwhile as the Corvette is.

Companies go overseas for manufacturing because it increases profit overall. Google isn't concerned with that. In their minds they have plenty of money. If Google wanted to maximize profit they wouldn't keep selling Nexus devices at 350 a pop.

I'm not claiming you're pompous, but I think there's a 60/40 chance (in my favor) of either of us being right. Google isn't just going to let Motorola or the Moto X die, because they can take the short term hit.

Phallic measuring contest, really? I'm not denying that the Moto Xs point was to provide unique and original features. I get that but it still could've been done better. Motorola should have focused on marketing Moto maker and getting the X more exposure instead of being so phantom with it. I see you're tipping the probability in your favor even though you said there's a 50/50 chance one of us is right.

I think there's a 80/20 that I'm right given that Moto has done this several times with different phones. I've barely seem them mention the Atrix HD and god knows how many damn Razrs they have on the plate.

You're wrong regarding google and Motorola. Google bought Motorola for patents not profits. Motorola is still their own company running under google. That doesn't mean they need to bleed cash. It makes more sense to cut costs rather than try and be original with a marketing slogan.

Yes, comparing specs between a phone like the Moto X and, say, a Galaxy S4 is little more than that. It's a numbers game that does little to reflect real world performance for the owner. Think about it.

I do agree the marketing could have done better, and I wish Motomaker didn't start out as an exclusive, but you have to remember who usually holds the cards in the US-the carriers. At any rate, exclusivity is soon to be a non issue, and I've seen more ads pop up for the Moto X and Motomaker recently. They even paid for World Series spots.

The Atrix HD was a midranger, not meant to be advertised heavily. The Razrs are more Verizon's property (and responsibility to advertise) than Motorola's. Motorola hasn't had a cross carrier flagship since the original RAZR flip phone. Its unfair to compare the Moto X to the other devices you mentioned.

Come on, Mxy, no one ever believed the line Google fed the public about Motorola's purchase being just about the patents. It's true that they hold Motorola at arm's length enough to dispel concerns about favoritism, but there was an article about the behind the scenes of the Moto X's creation wherein Motorola guys were interviewed and told the reporter that Google came in and basically said "all right guys, we got your back. Finish what you've started, but take a break after that. Don't worry about profits, rushing out a new product or anything. Just take some time to come out with something completely new." Motorola may have lost a quarter of a billion dollars last quarter, but you can tell that Google isn't breaking a sweat. They really don't care if Motorola continues to bleed for another year or so. They want Motorola to instead focus on doing great things long term. And they are. After all, even you can admit that Project Ara is pretty damn sweet.

Ok you make a point about the real world usage with specs. It will vary from person person but we are speaking generally here.

The Motomaker is going to cost in the long run. If there's no huge demand to generate the revenue it needs to cover the costs, then it's pretty much going to hurt Motorola because they're bleeding cash. If I'm not mistake, they were doing pretty bad last time an article was written about their outlook.

The Atrix HD is upper midrange to low high end. I wouldn't necessary call it a midrange phone. Yeah it had the price but it wasn't necessary a midrange phone. It was still cutting edge and performed well according to people who've used it.

A business bleeding cash left and right will not look good to investors. Google can handle it since they're a monopoly. But if Google is keeping Motorola at arms length and allowing them to do their own thing then obviously patents was the main reason Google bought them out.

Yes, speaking generally, the specs are enough, or even more than enough, for the average user. It's not a phone for absolutely everybody, just those at the top of the bell curve. Yes, there are those who need a bigger screen and expandable storage, or who will beat the crap out of their phone's processing power, and the Moto X is not really for them. However, for your average Joe, especially the Joe who's coming from an iPhone or a basic phone (or even a Blackberry) the Moto X is practically perfect.

You're right about the eventuality if Motomaker doesn't pan out, but it's tautological: if Motomaker doesn't pan out, it will cost more money than it makes, and hurt Motorola. However, if it DOES pan out, then it will be a fantastic moneymaker for Motorola, since Motomaker phones only get assembled as needed. Indeed, the last quarter didn't look good for Motorola, but that quarter included the startup costs for the Texas facility and barely a month of Droid and Moto X sales. Even with that, there was a survey that showed that Motorola's market share actually increased for September, where everyone else but Apple remained flat.

On paper the Atrix HD looks better than it actually performed. Battery life kinda sucked, the build quality was pretty chintzy, and the phone lacked internal memory. It didn't really deserve the Atrix name. It was a Razr Lite. I will agree that its customer satisfaction according to at least one survey was pretty good, but it wasn't really cutting edge. By the time it came out, the Galaxy S3 and HTC One X/Evo LTE had already come out. It also offered nothing special to make up for its mediocrity in the numbers game, completely unlike the Moto X, which forgoes the big numbers in order to provide those unique features we've discussed.

As for investors, they seem pretty happy with Google. Its stock shot up after its Q3 earnings announcement, the one with that nasty quarter billion loss on Motorola's part. It's remained roughly at that level (over 1000 dollars a share!) since. Google keeps Motorola at arm's length over the Android software included, but still has clearly influenced them. Name one phone that Motorola released prior to the Moto X that really looked like it and had such a unifying philosophy. Google has pushed for Motorola to be more innovative than they were before, to push in new directions that other manufacturers haven't ventured.

And I think the execution that Motorola's bringing to Ara is pretty good, from what we've seen. The only thing they haven't said they'll do which I think would improve what they're doing would be to actually build any modular parts engineered by other companies and individuals themselves, at least for the smaller guys, as it would level the playing field between garage inventors and larger companies.

I don’t quite understand your last sentence. I don’t think the iPhone is basic nor is it strictly for the average Joe. The problem is that you claim it’s for the average Joe, but the price of it is far higher than it should be since you’re implying it to be simplistic. The specs may be decent for what it’s for, but that still doesn't justify the premium pricing. The rumors and speculation kept saying the X was supposed to have monster specs and be top of the line.

By the time it supposedly pans out, newer and far more capable phones will be out and the X will be left behind. It doesn't take long for an Android phone to become outdated. The X is already a few months old and is losing ground more and more. The costs for the Texas facility and the overall long term costs are precisely why “Made in America” will cost them and cause them to rethink that strategy when they realize how much money they’re bleeding to a lost cause.

So a Kevlar backing, very affordable price, good specs matching bang for the buck, and LTE weren't unique? It’s more cutting edge than the X phone. At least it actually had a chance compared to the X, which btw suffered a few price cuts. The S3 and One X lines were high end phones but the Atrix HD was for people who wanted good specs for a fair price. There’s nothing remotely unique about the X phone.
They’re pushing them to be more innovative, but that doesn't mean Google’s taking an active role in how Motorola’s ran. They are still a business and a business has to make profit otherwise what’s the point in being innovative if you’re not bringing cash in. Google bought Motorola for patents and they have a good bit of them.

Maybe it’ll be innovative for backyard inventors and techies, but it won’t really pan out in the long run. Replacing parts like a computer to keep it relevant, I doubt that will be sustainable other than to a niche market.

Sorry, I should have clarified. If someone is looking to make the switch from a different platform to Android, first impressions mean a lot. I've seen many customers who think of Android in terms of the Galaxy devices: huge, with tons of features, but sometimes overwhelming, with seemingly chintzy build quality.

However, the Moto X is much closer in size to the iPhone, has a much less overwhelming UI (it's stock Android, and leaves the home screen almost entirely blank to start with) and has a core group of great, easily understood features without having too much to learn.

As for the price issue, it's largely moot now since the Moto X's on contract price is a mere 100 bucks for 16 GB. I still think that its feature set and quality of build justified the original on contract price, but I'll acknowledge it is a far easier sell now that it's half the price it was. As opposed to its first month when I could hardly get one to sell, I've now sold about 7 in the last week, in addition to a couple of Droids.

As for the rumors and speculation, the very earliest rumors (some of which actually were generated by my contact with Motorola) got most everything right except for the processor, and looking back, was probably using a prototype of the Droid Maxx. Now in this half of the year, the rumors can be coalesced to show that they were referring to four distinct devices; the Moto X itself, the Droid line, the Moto G, and Project Ara.

The Atrix HD was good for its price point (other than the storage and overall build quality) but LTE was more commonplace at that point in 2012. It wasn't cutting edge by any means, though. What makes the Moto X more cutting edge is that the Moto X aims to change the way people interact with their phones, and it does so quite well.

I still disagree that Google bought Motorola solely for patents. That was a big part of the equation, yes, especially since at the time Motorola was starting to hint at going all patent troll on other Android competitors, which wouldn't do. However, Google saw a diamond in the rough, and knew that if they nurtured Motorola properly and gave it a chance, it could eventually turn a profit.

As for Ara, I think it'll have good success out of the US, where phones are much more expensive to replace entirely. As long as the support is there in the long term it'll be a sensible solution that will save tons of money and materials.

In most senses, that is the case when you think about it. Not lumping all phones under that assumption, but most of them do tack on unnecessary bloat and features along with having the poorest of build quality.

Yes, the Moto X is simplistic compared to Motorola's past offerings. But so does the Nexus 5 and it stands out far more than the X does. It's going to be relevant for the fact that it has updates directly from Google. Consistent updates that is.

The features may be good along with build quality but that doesn't still justify the price it used to sell. Again, the Atrix HD was similar in many ways and yet it was only $99 on contract. The only thing the X had going for it was customizing it but that didn't really pan out as well as Motorola thought. The Atrix was unique in that it offered pretty highend specs for an affordable price.

Maybe so but that's why rumors shouldn't be fueled so much here that ends up giving the wrong impression. In the beginning it was similar to the whole Bionic fiasco since nothing was confirmed at all.

They need to actually have cash flowing in before they start trying to go for something significant.

Gave them a chance at what? They did turn a profit when they first started the Droid line. But shafting customers over and over has hurt them as I said before. That's really the only reason I could see Google wasting money on Motorola - for patents.

Maybe outside the US but in the US I don't see that being supportive for a good bit.

Bingo. The Nexus and Motorola's offerings are the only two good quality devices that offer a minimum of bloat.

The Nexus 5 is a better deal if you have no need for the Moto X's extra features, which is why both devices exist. That's what I love about Android; there's something for everyone.

When comparing the Atrix HD and Moto X you need to stop disregarding the Moto X's feature set, because it is a huge value add along with the customization. I would still take the Moto X any day over the Atrix HD.

The beginnings of the Moto X and Bionic stories couldn't be more different. The Bionic was officially announced at CES 2011. In the subsequent months, issues with the Bionic's design surfaced (mainly around its battery life while supporting both LTE and a dual core processor) and the original design was scrapped. In the ensuing months Motorola had to scramble to build an entirely new phone and call that the Bionic instead.

The Moto X lived up to its code name of Ghost by appearing as an intangible project that Motorola didn't officially unveil until August 1st, with hype built from unofficial rumors and leaks. There was no promise or official announcement prior to August 1st.

There was one instance of "shafting" customers, which you cite again and again without fail. This was the ICS update issue for the Atrix, Photon and Electrify. We've covered this issue extensively. You know what I think: Motorola made the least ducky decision they could given the circumstances. We've also discussed the release timing of the Bionic and Razr, to which I say that without the Bionic, Motorola would have gone over a year without a new Verizon flagship, which would have hurt them more than having some customers annoyed that the RAZR (which didn't have much beyond thickness to separate it from the Bionic) came out so soon.

You are an enigma, Mxy. You don't seem like you really want Motorola to fail, but you hold relatively ancient history against them and declare that you would never recommend them to anyone who asked. Your positions and adamant nature on this topic raise interesting questions about why you care so deeply about what happened in the past, yet betray a desire to see Motorola succeed.

Last time a Sprint Employee was caught taking a picture of one of these, it resulted in an entire Call center being closed which meant approx 1000 people lost their jobs. So yes, it is an internal document only for sprint employee's to see until the announcement is made.

Apple with three new iPads in March, including a bezel-less 10.9-inch model

How to shoot RAW photos with your iPhone

All content (phone reviews, news, specs, info), design and layouts are Copyright 2001-2016 phoneArena.com. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part or in any form or medium without written permission is prohibited! Privacy . Terms of use . Cookies . Team